Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
Member Login
Site Notices
9/22/2017 12:11:25 AM
Arrow Left Previous Page
Page / 2
Posted: 10/10/2003 7:45:36 PM EDT
The M-16 A2 was the "improved" version of the M-16 A1, right? Improvements included the following:

- Better rear sights
- Better handgurads
- Replacement of FA with 3 round burst

So the M-16 A3 is the "improved" version of the A2(?) Improvements include:

Replacement of 3 round burst with FA

WTF???!!!

Is burst now worthless? if not, then why doesn't the A3 have a 4 pos switch instead of a 3 position?

Is the A4 burst, FA, or both?
Link Posted: 10/10/2003 8:04:30 PM EDT
Also a heavier barrel after the front site tower,lower receiver reinforcements at the front pivot and rear take down pin areas,furniture is stronger 43% glass filed nylon,new twist rate,shell deflector to shoot lefty,new flash hider with closed off bottom slot and the newer full size is just a fullsize version of the M4.The flaw with the burst mechanism is it dosent reset itself.Say you set it to burst and there are 2 rounds left in the mag,when it runs them off and you reload the next time you squeeze the trigger only 1 shot will fire same will happen if you squeeze to lightly and dont let off a full burst.It does not reset itself.The burst is useless,better off with full=auto and proper fire discipline.
Link Posted: 10/10/2003 8:57:19 PM EDT
Now that's what I call an answer, 927. What's the new twist rate, & what thought went behind it? Also, why did they go for the heavier barrel? was it for FA durability?
Link Posted: 10/10/2003 9:18:03 PM EDT
A follow-on question: What are the distinguishing features of the actual MILITARY models(not civilian "usage"): M16A4 M4 M4A1 M4A2 (if it formally exists)
Link Posted: 10/10/2003 11:13:16 PM EDT
Is burst worthless? Yes.
Link Posted: 10/10/2003 11:31:56 PM EDT
On the 3 round burst rifle, the trigger pull changes from position to position on the sear, therefore, accuracy is impaired.
Link Posted: 10/10/2003 11:45:21 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 10/10/2003 11:47:57 PM EDT by model927]
To PULPSMACK the new twist was 1/7 wich was to stabilize the new tracer round wich is rarely used.It will stabilize the heavier 77gr bullets.The heavier barrel was for a more solid feel,less barrel whip and less chance the barrel will bend past the front sight wich was common to the skinnier barrels when they got hot,Airborne drops,and in vietnam using the 3 prong suppressor and barrel as a prybar to open crates.The heavier barrel is stiffer aiding in accuracy.I would say you get better heat dispersion than in a lighter barrel so in full auto it would probably make for a more reliable barrel than the older spec ones. The M16A4-Flat top full size version of M4A1.It has a RAS system,Fore grip,Acog site or aimpoint and I beleive it is full-auto M4-the first issue carbine, standard A2 carbine fixed handle with 3 round burst standard hand guards. M4A1-flat top carbine with RAS and foregrip.Full Auto capable and now they have a medium weight barrel to resist heat better. M4A2-will probably be the product improved M4A1 with the heavier barrel and the new bolt/carrier design,these are just my assumptions though.I have also heard that new M203 grenade launchers and short barreled shotgunsAKA master key will be quick release and attach to the bottom part of the ras system.I say frre float the barrel and make it a heavy and you can snipe with it or lay down a wall of lead on full-auto and the barrel will take it.To AR10ER thats absolutely right.
Link Posted: 10/11/2003 1:36:16 AM EDT
Originally Posted By model927: To PULPSMACK the new twist was 1/7 wich was to stabilize the new tracer round wich is rarely used.It will stabilize the heavier 77gr bullets.
View Quote
I thought 1/7 twist pertained to the 16" (or shorter) barrel for tracers, not the 20". There's a problem then for 20" 1/9 twist barrels firing tracers, or is this merely for uniformity (or some other reason)?
Link Posted: 10/11/2003 7:29:50 AM EDT
No you can fire tracers out the 20" 1/9 although the newer tracer would be slightly less stable.the 1/7 is the standard for military rifles and carbines its just that the new tracer is a bit longer and is stabilized better by the faster twist.Like you could fire ss109 out of the old 1/12 but with the slower rate and heavier bullet of the ss109 you would not get enough range and power at the longer ranges with the slower twist it would only be effective close up.The 1/9 will stabilize a wide variety of weights up to I beleive 69 gr any thing heavier would be better suited to the 1/7 although the slower twist makes the bullet fragmenting more reliable.Thats why in vietnam the first M16s had a 1/14 twist and 55 gr bullets were devastating what ever they hit.
Link Posted: 10/11/2003 11:52:36 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 10/11/2003 11:52:53 AM EDT by DevL]
Originally Posted By model927: ...although the slower twist makes the bullet fragmenting more reliable.Thats why in vietnam the first M16s had a 1/14 twist and 55 gr bullets were devastating what ever they hit.
View Quote
This is incorrect the rate of twist has NO quanifiable effect on terminal performance. Please read [url]www.ammo-oracle.com[/url]
Link Posted: 10/11/2003 2:41:24 PM EDT
Realy! thats not what special warfare special weapons had to say,The only reason why the twist was changed to 1/12 is because the 14 twist didnt satisfiy the armys acuracy requirements in cold weather and after action reports on performance state how vietcong hit with the older 16 were being disembowled with torso hits and holes the size of grapefruits being made in people.The slower twist didnt stabilize the bullet enough in flight so when it hit something results were catastrophic.Thats why the 1/7 twist rate causes rounds to zip throgh people plus the fact that ss109has a steel core making it somewhat armor piercing.I dont care what ammo oracle says,The after action reports speak for themselves plus the fact that the 1/14 twist made worse wounds than the 1/12,twist rate does effect velocity wich in turn effects the fragmentation of the bullet and I have heard first hand stories from veterans who used the earlier rifle and I wouldnt say those guys are lying.Advisers,Seals and special forces were among the first to get the 1/14 twist M16 so for me first hand knowledge from guys who used it wins out over ammo oracle along with the many articles describing what horific wounds the M16 caused when it first came into service. Wich by the way got the attention of the red cross wich called the round and rifle that fired it "inhumane" because of the damage done.So how come when the twist went to 1/12 it did less damage than the 1/14?I would say real stable bullets do less damage than unstable ones.I know I wouldnt want to get hit by a round wobbling in mid flight as oposed to one flying straighter,But then again I realy would not want to get shot at all and least of all by a round that keyholed before it hit.
Link Posted: 10/11/2003 3:53:06 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 10/11/2003 3:55:37 PM EDT by DevL]
Originally Posted By model927: Realy! thats not what special warfare special weapons had to say,The only reason why the twist was changed to 1/12 is because the 14 twist didnt satisfiy the armys acuracy requirements in cold weather and after action reports on performance state how vietcong hit with the older 16 were being disembowled with torso hits and holes the size of grapefruits being made in people.The slower twist didnt stabilize the bullet enough in flight so when it hit something results were catastrophic. Thats why the 1/7 twist rate causes rounds to zip throgh people plus the fact that ss109has a steel core making it somewhat armor piercing.I dont care what ammo oracle says,The after action reports speak for themselves plus the fact that the 1/14 twist made worse wounds than the 1/12,twist rate does effect velocity wich in turn effects the fragmentation of the bullet and I have heard first hand stories from veterans who used the earlier rifle and I wouldnt say those guys are lying.Advisers,Seals and special forces were among the first to get the 1/14 twist M16 so for me first hand knowledge from guys who used it wins out over ammo oracle along with the many articles describing what horific wounds the M16 caused when it first came into service. Wich by the way got the attention of the red cross wich called the round and rifle that fired it "inhumane" because of the damage done.So how come when the twist went to 1/12 it did less damage than the 1/14?I would say real stable bullets do less damage than unstable ones.I know I wouldnt want to get hit by a round wobbling in mid flight as oposed to one flying straighter,But then again I realy would not want to get shot at all and least of all by a round that keyholed before it hit.
View Quote
What can I say? Gee you got me [rolleyes] You obviously have read some crap that was wrong in a book or some word of mouth BS and have no real education on this subject. The entire scientific ballistics community disagrees with you, these people devote their enitre lives to ballistics and wound research. Everyone on this forum disagrees with you. You are wrong. Please just face up to your ignorance and stop spreading misinformation. Next you will say the moon landing was a hoax and we all need to wear tinfoil liners in our hats... Edited to add: Thank you and have a nice day. Now I cant be accused of being rude [:)]
Link Posted: 10/11/2003 4:35:54 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 10/11/2003 4:37:50 PM EDT by model927]
Number one I dont care what every one thinks just what veterans who actualy used the rifle in combat have said and your attitude sucks. second the book was put out by the navy seal museum"SPECIAL WARFARE SPECIAL WEAPONS"and third between the M16 and then the A1 same ammo 2 different twist rates yet one rifle wounded better than the newer model with a faster twist,I suppose your a scientist or have some first hand combat experience with the rifle.Yea the ammo oracle is scientific when hypothetical situations about shooting zombies is brought up.And science is not 100% seeing is beleiving.So what combat experience do you have with the M16 or any of the scientific experts have?You must wander around here just looking for threads to criticize,GET A LIFE,sounds like too much time on your hands and again Ill say what COMBAT experience do you have with the rifle or are you just another arm chair commando because you are certainly not the last authority on the subject.Twist rate effects velocity and velocity dictates how well it will fragment along with the bullet design but I beleive the twist is a factor and I never proclaimed to be a scientist but I do have first hand experience with the rifle at the range and otherwise.
Link Posted: 10/11/2003 5:54:48 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 10/11/2003 5:55:43 PM EDT by wyv3rn]
Sometimes.. there are just those people that you have to give up on DevL. [;)]
Link Posted: 10/11/2003 7:51:02 PM EDT
Originally Posted By DevL:
Everyone on this forum disagrees with you. You are wrong. Please just face up to your ignorance and stop spreading misinformation.
View Quote
I do not disagree with him. I have heard the same information.
Link Posted: 10/11/2003 7:53:18 PM EDT
model927: Your post is a perfect example of ignoring all valid scientific data and simply wallowing around in your own ignorance. You asked for examples - how's the Director of the Wound Ballistics Laboratory at the Letterman Army Institute of Reasearch, Col. Martin L Fackler sound to you ? Now retired from the Army, he has multiple tours of duty as a combat surgeon in Vietnam. Scientific AND first hand exprience. Feel free to ignore his research too.
Link Posted: 10/11/2003 8:03:12 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 10/11/2003 8:04:24 PM EDT by model927]
Ive seen first hand what the weapon is capable of myself.like I said M16 and M16A1 same ammo used 1/14 twist on the M16 and 1/12 on the A1 the 1/14 twist made worse wounds than the A1 using the same ammo so whats the reason?what was changed between both models? the twist rate thats what all to make the A1 more accurate in cold weather at the sacrafice of lethality. and has this surgeon ever used a weapon offesively and walked up to the unfortunate receiver of death to see the dammage...enough said if there is any ignorance here its to the ones who talk based on no first hand experience...927 out.Oh and by the way ballistic gelatin no matter what ideal teperature its kept as is not flesh,bone and living tissue.
Link Posted: 10/11/2003 8:21:25 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 10/11/2003 8:22:49 PM EDT by DevL]
They have done live hogs as a test medium too and your silly twist theory does not hold water. Nor does it hold true on the experiences of hunters. My only fear is someone will listen to your advice and it could get them hurt. Thankfully no police department nor the US military believes what you do. Its the civilians who are looking for something to use to defend themselves or their families that I am worried might believe what your are saying. If you are reading this and considering a firearm and ammo for self defense please do some independant research. Look up articles by the International Wound Ballistics Association. These people exist to keep misinformation like yours out of the selection process. [url]http://www.iwba.com[/url]
Link Posted: 10/11/2003 8:26:59 PM EDT
Oh and by the way ballistic gelatin no matter what ideal teperature its kept as is not flesh,bone and living tissue.
View Quote
Neither is Rolled Homegeous Armour a Tank but it is a good way to compare two anti-armour rounds to each other in penetrative ability. As such, ballistic gelatin is excellent for comparing the terminal effect of two different rounds to one another for penetration, expansion and other terminal effects. Ballistic gelatin may not be a human being but if a M193 round showed a greater tendancy to tumble from a 1/14 twist than a 1/12 twist, then it woul show this effect in ballistic gelatin by tumbling significantly earlier with the 1/14 twist launched projectile.
Link Posted: 10/11/2003 11:02:43 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 10/13/2003 7:15:27 PM EDT by AK_Mike]
Originally Posted By model927: Ive seen first hand what the weapon is capable of myself[/quote More than a veteran combat surgeon? Did you have any medical training to understand what you saw? Just how many people did you kill and examine?
and has this surgeon ever used a weapon offesively and walked up to the unfortunate receiver of death to see the dammage...enough said if there is any ignorance here its to the ones who talk based on no first hand experience
View Quote
Dude, the man was a veteran COMBAT surgeon! No shooter is going to have more experience evaluating wounds than the MEDICAL surgeon who's job is to examine the combat wounds. The surgeon will have aggregately seen more wounds than the shooter cause the shooter shoots a few, but all then come to one guy who sees the wounds over and over and over. He also has the proper knowledge and training to evalute the wounds, more than a shooter who has been given the skills to kill, not be a surgeon. I will always believe independent scientific testing done properly instead of veterans tales. Just cause they were vets does not mean they could not be wrong. There is just way too much data and current testing done by multiple groups under controlled conditions that disprove your theory. Just admit you could be wrong, and examine the bulk of accepted data that is available, not just one book, not on veteran heresay. Even when I am sure I except the fact that I could be wrong. In this case, since 99% dissagree, it warrants further investigation on your part. Edited to add: My post was worded poorly. I have utmost admiration and respect for our soldiers, period. Just because it is "heresay", I don't mean to say that what they said is wrong. All I meant was that they are humans too, capable of error. A lot veterans say is correct (there were THERE), but some is not. Not every veteran with experience is absolutely honest, absolutely infallible - some were misinformed, misled, or misunderstood what they saw. Scientific study is not the end all, but by it's nature of controlled conditions (leaving less room for error) and repeatable results is certainly reasonable to assume it may be correct, and gives me more confidence than someones thirdhand info passed along. Doesn't mean they are wrong though, it just raises the possibility. If we didn't disagree on subjects on this board, we wouldn't learn nearly as much. Only the truth can withstand the acid tests, the attacks, and test of time. The falsehoods are likely to be struck down when the dust clears. That's good for all of us. Me, I'm not an expert, but I can reference a few, and try to learn, learn, learn.
Link Posted: 10/12/2003 3:15:14 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 10/12/2003 3:31:01 AM EDT by model927]
I could be wrong,I am man enough to say although Im still walking this earth so decisions ive made had to be more right than wrong through my life. but like you said "tesing under controlled conditions"combat dosent take place in a controlled environment you will never duplicate conditions no matter how many pigs or gelatin you shoot,you should admit that you dont know the other potential factors that could be involved and with the way some of you talk I assume you fellas fought there in vietnam? or have some first hand experience another question never answered by the brow beater with the "scary name" and like I said in earlier posts"ive seen it first hand"these arent veterans tales and stories and to suggest that shows how todays generation has no respect for those who have gone before them. So Ill pose the question again since no one has answered it. Why under the same conditions using the same ammunition would the later model M16A1 not wound as bad as the M16? Simple when you look at both models the only changes made was the twist rate and chrome lining the chamber then bore, unless some one is going to suggest adding the chrome lining killed its terminal effect or maybe the forward assist because aside from twist those were the only improvements.Its the same environment and same ammo from 2 different variants one wounding better than the other,everything the same environmentaly except the weapons.And rest assured to people looking for a weapon to protect theselves and families,The m16 with 55 gr ammo will kill you.And to who ever asked me how many people ive killed I say enough to make this liberty loving country safe enough for you ask such a question.Killing is not something to be proud of its something the real warrior is reluctant to do but does when it has to be done.I have a great respect for the enemies I have fought and am glad on the days we met it was I who prevailed and not them.Killing and war is horrible and to see how it gets glorified here at times is beyond me.They should make serving in our armed forces mandatory again so some of you fellas can get a better perspective on life and the information you get.And I dont care about percentages,How many who have posted on this thread have first hand experience or are just going by what they see hear and read the way many of you assumed my information was coming from.I never proclaimed to be saying the word of god just talking about what I have seen with my eyes.
Link Posted: 10/12/2003 5:16:57 AM EDT
Some fact and some opinion. Never had a 1:14 in Viet-Nam, but the 1:12's we used seemed to work fine. However these were usually very close in fire fights or ambushes we initiated where I think the near point-blank velocity had more to do with terminal effect than bullet stabilization. So I think the 1:14 stories of early SF Viet-Nam legend may have been the first hand accounts after switching from an M14 (7.62) to an M16 where the wounding differences were particularly distinct. Thus the spin the M16 was given early on. Then before the M16A1 was delivered to the Army in large quantities, the 1:12 twist was instituted to meet minimum accuracy requirements in cold, dense artic air, but in my experience, the 1:12 did not lack for lethality as I described previously. Now comes the 1:7 twist M16A2 where all the "experts" said that the old M193 ammo, which we had a 10 year supply of in 1980-83, "would be so over stablized that that it will drill right through you." Well this proved (in gelatine at 50 meters, 300 meters, and in three New Jersey deer, just not to be true. My 1980-83 pictures of the 50 meter gelatine blocks show M193 from a 1:7, 20" barrel, tumbling at about the same point (3.5" after initial penetration) as the SS109 from the same 1:7 barrel. So what this showed me was that a "grossly over-stablized bullet" designed for a 1:14 twist did not in any way, shape, form behave like all the experts had predicted, even though its spin rate (rpm) had been doubled 1:14 divided by 2 = 1:7). I also have seen that actual human bodies taking shots are very random and unpredictable, and that at very close range a rifle velocity bullet is far more likely to yaw than a hit from 300 yards away. So my theory is that although there may be a slight difference in "density" between warm air and very cold air, that the 1/1,000th of a second "transition" from air, to inside and then traversing a "by comparison" extremely dense human body, is so extreme (that is to say the transition into flesh slows the bullet up way too fast) that slide rullers and pocket calculators running math formulas based on gel blocks are pretty much useless for predicting what will happen inside a wound cavity--given that a real wound cavity has organs of different densities, air pockets, bone, etc. And don't forget about getting through clothing and such.
Link Posted: 10/12/2003 7:32:49 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 10/12/2003 7:37:33 AM EDT by model927]
Well said COLD BLUE thats all I was trying to say is that diiferent factors along with the different twist could effect how the wounds happen and science isnt the last word on the subject flesh.bone and other factors gelatin blocks cannot duplicate.Its good to get information from some one who has first hand knowledge and experience.Hope fully you wont be labeled as spinning "veterans"tales as I was .Thanks for the insight and the selfless service to your country.
Link Posted: 10/12/2003 8:51:29 AM EDT
COLD BLUE, Excellent post!! I don't know why this subject is so tense. Model927 I apologize for the rudeness of us younger folks. All I can say is I don't know if I'd trust anybody that calls himself "Devil". I think there are good points on all sides. I am reading a book called 'the teams' about some of the navy seal "plankowners" and the book confirms that they had the m-16 before anyone else. The gentleman in the book called it an ar15 so I don't know if that meant it wasn't fully auto. But it definitely was the 5.56 round. The book so far doesn't delve into wound charactaristics of the round but it does confirm that Mr. model927 may have a clue. It does make sense to me that the 1/14 would not stabalize the bullet as well. Which in my opinion make it not so accurate out to longer ranges than 50 yards/meters. And I believe devl has read some credible information I think he is being a little gung ho about the whole thing. Theory is always at the mercy of real experience. I think weather plays a role in afghanastan also, and probably range. Obviously the farther the range the less velocity the less yawing and fragmentation. Also I believe there has been studies on cold weather dropping velocities. In my opinion this would be true of a fmj bullet of any caliber. The slower the velocity the less damage. Simple. Devl, I don't think he's necessarily disagreeing with everything that the scientists have figured out he's just basing his knowledge on experience. But if you're rude and piss someone off they're not going to be all the accepting of the information you give them. No one is going to lose his life here because of what one guy says. I'd rather have a 5.56 with a 1/14 twist than nothing. Or I'd rather have it over a handgun. Now really, just take a few breaths and relax. We all should be a team here and not put each other down. There's enough critics out there we don't need fellow rifleman pissing on each other. And man, the guy is a veteran, you should be kissing his ass. You don't know what struggles he's been through or sacrifices he's made for our well being. HAVE A LITTLE RESPECT regardless if you agree with him or not. Well Golly. By the way, model927, thank you for serving, I appreciate it very much. My grandpa died in france. 2nd Infantry!!!!!
Link Posted: 10/12/2003 8:55:30 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 10/12/2003 9:02:18 AM EDT by HeavyMetal]
As I said above. The gel blocks cannot tell you how a round will perform when it strikes a human body but it can tell you how two ronds behave in relation to one another. Our modern technological society is based on emperical and not subjective expermentation. Subjective Opinion did not put a man on the moon nor does it make a plane fly. [b]Again, I state: If a 55gr bullet fired from a 1/14 twist has more of a tendancy to tumble earlier inside flesh then it will also tumble earlier inside ballistic gelatin. It may not tumble at the same point in gel as in flesh but it wil be proportional to the difference in both mediums.[/b] Take both twists and shoot both into gel if you want your question answered as to which tumbles more readily. there are no hidden laws of physics that will mask the effect in gel but leave the effect intact in human flesh.
Link Posted: 10/12/2003 9:12:13 AM EDT
Originally Posted By JJREA: COLD BLUE, Excellent post!! I don't know why this subject is so tense. Model927 I apologize for the rudeness of us younger folks. All I can say is I don't know if I'd trust anybody that calls himself "Devil". I think there are good points on all sides. I am reading a book called 'the teams' about some of the navy seal "plankowners" and the book confirms that they had the m-16 before anyone else. The gentleman in the book called it an ar15 so I don't know if that meant it wasn't fully auto. But it definitely was the 5.56 round. The book so far doesn't delve into wound charactaristics of the round but it does confirm that Mr. model927 may have a clue. It does make sense to me that the 1/14 would not stabalize the bullet as well. Which in my opinion make it not so accurate out to longer ranges than 50 yards/meters. And I believe devl has read some credible information I think he is being a little gung ho about the whole thing. Theory is always at the mercy of real experience. I think weather plays a role in afghanastan also, and probably range. Obviously the farther the range the less velocity the less yawing and fragmentation. Also I believe there has been studies on cold weather dropping velocities. In my opinion this would be true of a fmj bullet of any caliber. The slower the velocity the less damage. Simple. Devl, I don't think he's necessarily disagreeing with everything that the scientists have figured out he's just basing his knowledge on experience. But if you're rude and piss someone off they're not going to be all the accepting of the information you give them. No one is going to lose his life here because of what one guy says. I'd rather have a 5.56 with a 1/14 twist than nothing. Or I'd rather have it over a handgun. Now really, just take a few breaths and relax. We all should be a team here and not put each other down. There's enough critics out there we don't need fellow rifleman pissing on each other. And man, the guy is a veteran, you should be kissing his ass. You don't know what struggles he's been through or sacrifices he's made for our well being. HAVE A LITTLE RESPECT regardless if you agree with him or not. Well Golly. By the way, model927, thank you for serving, I appreciate it very much. My grandpa died in france. 2nd Infantry!!!!!
View Quote
Well said. I was just reading about the 2nd in the Battle of the Bulge. American fighting man at his best. What a mess that was.
Link Posted: 10/12/2003 9:18:35 AM EDT
bjhueni, well the good part of it is that my grandpa is forever a hero in my family. I named my son after him. And he's got a weird name. James Lafate Rea. But he was a warrior and to be honored. As is mr. model927, whatever his name is.
Link Posted: 10/12/2003 9:49:54 AM EDT
Link Posted: 10/12/2003 10:31:23 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 10/12/2003 10:36:42 AM EDT by Zhukov]
Let me add my own personal summary to this discussion: The discussion initially centered on the increased wounding potential of the 5.56 with slower rifling twists. The majority of us are disagreeing with this assertion. Let me try to elaborate mathematically: Please refer to [url=http://www.nennstiel-ruprecht.de/bullfly/gyrocond.htm#header]this page for a discussion of the gyroscopic stability condition[/url]. Let's look at that equation in terms of the bullet spin (Omega, w) required to get Sg=1. The solution is w= v/d * Sqrt(1/AB), where A=Ix/Iy and B=2Ix/r*pi*d^5*Cma. This is equal to w=v/d * Sqrt[(Iy*r*pi*d^5*Cma)/(2*Ix^2)]. Without going into any of the details of the formula, it is immediately apparent that the spin required to stabilize the bullet (w) varies to the square root of the 5th power of the density (d) of the medium. In other words: changes in density have a HUGE impact on the required spin to stabilize the bullet. I'm too lazy to look up the exact densities of air at 0F and 100F, but this difference is NEGLIGIBLE when it comes to the delta beween air and human tissue (water for the most part). Not only is the absolute delta huge, but that factor is increased by the square root of the fifth power. The change in rifling from 1-in-14 to 1-in-12 added an extra measure of stability from 0F to 100F. To stabilize the bullet in flesh, you'd need rifling about as tight as a machine screw's threads. The conclusion which can therefore be reached is that the bullet will be unstable in a dense medium, and the difference in the bullet's rotation rate from 1-in-14 to even 1-in-7 is negligible compared to the rifling twist rate required to stabilize the bullet in flesh. What happens once the bullet starts to yaw is obviously well documented - the forces imparted on the bullet in the case of the M193/SS109 are too great and the bullet fragments due to its thin jackets. ANY bullet will yaw once it encounters human flesh and will attempt to travel with its center of mass forward - base forward in the case of conical bullets. If anyone disagrees and starts mumbling about "scientists in lab coats and no practical experience," I would like to point out that those same scientists were able to develop nuclear weapons and computer chips (all without prior experience).
Link Posted: 10/12/2003 10:41:16 AM EDT
Thank you JJREA its men like your grand father and my father and veterans on this site older than me that have inspired me to follow them,and thanks to your grandfather he sacrificed all for what he loved and beleived in hes a real hero I gave a little bit your grandfather and others gave more than me for that I am forever grateful.And a little respect does go along way I dont expect any one to kiss my ass Im the same as all here no better.Its OK to disagree those are some of the values I hold dear its just the personal attacks and disrespect that is amazing to me.And to DEVL in spite of your words to me if you were my neighbor and neede help I would be there to help you reguardless of your opinion.We are all americans and all of you are my people no matter what.
Link Posted: 10/12/2003 11:22:34 AM EDT
I respect any veteran for what they have done for this country. I also get a bit overzealous in my conversion of the people who do not understand wound ballistics or have erroneous preconceptions. I still remember the day in '98 or '99 before the ammo-oracle, before knowing about the IWBA, before I started reading Doctors Fackler and Roberts' papers when I beilieved things similar to this. The person who first opened my mind up was Troy from this site. It was a slap in the face to me to say the least. I ate up wound ballistics info from then on. You know how much worse former smokers are than plain old non smokers are right? Well I suppose that holds true for me too. Also if you knew me you'd realise my pseudonym, DevL, is just an abbreviation of my real name and has no satanic connotation. Its not meant to be scary lol.
Link Posted: 10/12/2003 11:51:10 AM EDT
I can some times be overzealous myself.We can agree to disagree.I refered to your name as scary in an attempt to be sarcastic while not getting vulgar and no satanic connotations implied.It was just my opinion through experience and no ill will or resentment harbored towards you 927 out.[:D]
Link Posted: 10/12/2003 12:00:21 PM EDT
Zhukov, I'm glad that all makes sense to you. Personally, my head hurts after looking at that. The most scientific I get is figuring out the bowl movements of my baby daughter. "what color was it this time honey, green or yellow?" Happy shooting everyone. I do know this much, bullets can kill. And the more I shoot the ar, the more I like it. And this is a really great site to get some good info on the subject. Thank you all for your great comments. And again, model927, thanks for serving.
Link Posted: 10/12/2003 12:26:47 PM EDT
OK everyone. GROUP HUG !!! [:D] JJREA: I'm a engineer, and it's kind of hard to dissociate myself from my work.....
Link Posted: 10/12/2003 5:25:11 PM EDT
Group hug is fine but I hope this dosent mean we have to take warm showers together does it?[:D]out in the field you guys could just hose me down with a canteen I guess.
Link Posted: 10/13/2003 1:11:55 AM EDT
While you guys are busy hugging, may I play with your rifles?
Link Posted: 10/13/2003 9:40:20 AM EDT
My rifle yes my gun no one for fighting one for fun[:D] hey I got your message mike sent one back to ya..Dave[:D]
Link Posted: 10/13/2003 12:53:11 PM EDT
Originally Posted By model927: I could be wrong...
View Quote
I'll absolutely agree with that part. I think just about the only other thing you've said that was factual was this:
The only reason why the twist was changed to 1/12 is because the 14 twist didnt satisfiy the armys acuracy requirements in cold weather...
View Quote
Everything else is derived from false information, myths, and hearsay. If you don't like the oracle, that's fine. But you're making yourself look like a moron when you spout these "facts" and decry the truth that the oracle represents. Yes, we discussed shooting zombies. Why? Because the oracle was written to answer FAQ's. "What round would be best for zombies" is a question that is often asked on this board as a joke, so we added it to the oracle as a joke as well. Don't like it? Fine, don't read it. But don't go around spreading lies.
Link Posted: 10/13/2003 1:39:34 PM EDT
Gee...I thought only democrats personally attacked people, when trying to make a point. Guess I'll have to rethink that idea?
Link Posted: 10/13/2003 1:45:12 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 10/13/2003 1:50:28 PM EDT by model927]
Just when things have already been hashed out some one else comes along and adds fuel to the fire and I suppose you have combat experience with the rifle if so add some facts from "your combat experience"or shut up with your criticism.Its easy to be a smart ass over the computer Im sure face to face your attitude would be entirely different.So what you are saying is veterans first hand accounts are myths and hearsay,like I said no respect from those who have no first hand experience if you do lets hear it "ARM CHAIR COMMANDO"I guess you wont post again until you get info on what unit you "MYTHICALLY"served with if you want to call me a "LIAR say it directly instead of being a pussy about it and accusing me of lies.And the only lie is obviously you have never seen what the round does ...I have so lets hear your story JACK ASS.Just because you have 5000+ posts dosent make you the final expert on the subject go back and read posts from others who have first hand experience.You lack humility so you are either ignorant or just an asshole with no respect.If you have anything elase to say Instant Message me and well talk life experiences some of the things ive seen are not for the consumption of the entire board.So come on GENERAL bring it on!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Link Posted: 10/13/2003 2:57:14 PM EDT
Hahaha... You think I haven't seen what it does? Get a clue. I think I'm a little more educated on this subject than most. And sorry, no IM's. I'd rather you hang your own ass out in public.
Link Posted: 10/13/2003 4:08:54 PM EDT
Brouhaha, is one of the main creators of the ammo-oracle and one of the two people who have done all the 10% calibrated ballistics gelatin tests found in the ammo forum.
Link Posted: 10/13/2003 4:28:18 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 10/13/2003 4:32:33 PM EDT by HeavyMetal]
Insinuating Brou is nothing more than an arm chair commando is nothing more than an ad-homenim attack, I.E. attacking the messenger instead of the message. Instead of belittling Brou, why don't you try disproving his arguments? What is wrong with the tests Brou has done? I would say that Brou is proabally one of the top ten in the whole frikkin' world on the terminal effects of the 5.56 and he has put his money where his mouth is time and time again.
Link Posted: 10/13/2003 4:56:01 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 10/13/2003 4:56:43 PM EDT by coldblue]
Heresay from unknown Veterans that have been pretty much overlooked by the scientfic community: "I think I saw a man with a rifle on the grassy noll, saw a muzzle flash and some smoke too." Another example from an unknown Scout, "General Custer, I've seen Indian sign all over this place, I think were ride'n into a trap."
Link Posted: 10/13/2003 5:17:40 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 10/13/2003 5:23:58 PM EDT by model927]
Hang my ass out,after things ive experienced every day has been gravy since.When you get of your lazy know it all ass and hump a pack and rifle for real and get into the shit then well talk,Like I said "ARM CHAIR COMMANDO"and if we ever met the only one getting their ass hung would be you like your words are suposed to scare me,Beleive me I know what to be scared about ,its kept me alive when ive needed it but its not you BROU.You responded to nothing ive said,But Im glad my sacrifices and the sacrifice of others have made it possible for you to have an opinion CANDY ASS.You must like to vacation as far north as possible,keep hiding behind your tough words,your real tough oooooooh I can smell the fear from here or did you just SHIT yourself,with out this site you probably wouldnt have a life...Find a wife and get laid you have to much time on your hands,I can see it now"hey honey come too bed...."Sorry honey I dont have time to screw you Im working on my research for the ammo oracle and thats important,Besides I dont have time to defend our way of life there are others to do it have to work on ammo oracle....Ill leave you with the words of mill because they suit you. When a man has nothing wich he is willing to fight for,nothing he cares about more than his own safety is a miserable creature who will never be free unless made and kept so by men better than himself...its good I chose not to be one of those creatures,pitty the same cannot be said for you..of course this only applies to men MR "I dont want to talk to you one on one"whatever you have to tell yourself to convince your spirit your not a PUSSY.And he started the berating and Ill finish it as far as not attacking the messenger in war you send the messenger back to his army with no head its only then they get the message.
Link Posted: 10/13/2003 5:28:30 PM EDT
Again, you attack Brouhaha yet you offer no indepth critique of his position? Why? What errors has Brou made in ammo-oracle and where are they? If he is putting out mis-information, you would do the world a service to point us to [b]exactly[/b] what is in error and why it is in error.
Link Posted: 10/13/2003 5:48:16 PM EDT
Unfortunately, I can't defend myself like I want to, since, as a moderator, I have to be...well, moderate. Secondly, if you have something to say other than insults and that holier than thou "I defended this country what have you done", go ahead. Until then, I'll skip over your posts assuming they'll be filled with name-calling or falsehoods. Let's not forget the spelling/punctuation that gives everybody a headache. Two words... spell check. Thirdly, you had better watch yourself with the personal attacks. I usually let this stuff roll off my back, but I have a feeling I won't with you.
Link Posted: 10/13/2003 6:09:45 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 10/13/2003 6:40:20 PM EDT by model927]
you started the personal attacks by saying the things you have said so dont threaten me. Do what you have to do 927 out.And Im not holier than thou you just have no respect obviously for people who serve.You want to banish me from here fine I guess the truth hurts....GROW UP.And you call yourself moderate you need an attitude adjustment so watch yourself.You want to excercise control because your a mederator then do it because this is the only place you have power,Do what you have to to make yourself feel big goes to show what a pitifull life you have,Your the one who started the ball rolling with the personal attacks calling me a liar and attacked my integrity and that I dont appreciate.You are not better than anyone else like I am not so if you want to kick me out of here and it will make you feel better than do it.You want to dish it out but then you dont want to take it.Im not gonna kiss your ass and I dont expect you to kiss mine.But dont call me a liar and accuse veterans of passing on myths and telling stories.I had friends who have sacrificed all and your not worthy enough to be a pimple on their ass.you want to kick me off do it so people will know your true charachter.Im glad Im not in a hole in the ground having to depend on you to watch my back so banish me if you want but IM NOT GONNA KISS YOUR ASS JUST IN THE HOPE THAT YOU WONT KICK ME OFF THIS SITE,you wont get that pleasure from me so like I said do what you have to do banish me and run away thats obviously what you are good at.Just cause I served I am no better than those I swore to give my life for but get off your high horse and be a man and admit you attacked me too.A real warrior does not look for battle but does not runaway when it comes either.And I never said you or your research were wrong I just passed on what I saw with my own eyes and I am called a Liar for it....that is disrespect,I dont accept unacceptable behavior from my children and I will not from you. My comments on twist rates were based on what I saw when I carried and used an A1 in the early 80s and what I saw when the A2 went into service by then I had transitioned to a guard unit,What I saw with my eyes isnt fantasy.Just remember a controlled scientific test on gelatin and pigs are not wounds suffered in combat.Books I saw information in only confirmed some of the things I saw.I never said I was the last word on the subject and admitted like a man I could be wrong but I saw with my eyes how different weapons with different twist rates wound,Maybe it wasnt the twist maybe it was different bone or organ density, people with diferent weights what have you there are plenty of variables your tests wont be able to duplicate just admit that your tests are not 100% either thats why its science and not the word of god and even if it were I would question that too this is AMERICA I have a right to question anything I want .One of the perks to living in a free society.
Link Posted: 10/13/2003 7:01:43 PM EDT
[img]http://userweb.elec.gla.ac.uk/a/abrown/pics/cornholio.gif[/img] [i]Are you threatning me Brouhaha?!?[/i]
Link Posted: 10/13/2003 7:13:54 PM EDT
[:D] now that is friggin funny[:D][:D]I am corn holio did you threaten me,That is rich I love it[:D]that made my night man.
Link Posted: 10/13/2003 7:37:08 PM EDT
Um, no dog in this fight. But, The M16A4 is burst, the A3 is a full-auto version of the A2. I have never seen an A3, they are supposedly for SF/Ranger only. My next door neighbor is SF, I will ask him about it.
Arrow Left Previous Page
Page / 2
Top Top